FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM

LOG IN Forgot Login? Register General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion  Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board Search Terms:  Search Within:  topics posts since 2019 2018 posts 2017 posts 2016 posts 2015 posts 2014 posts 2013 posts 2012 posts 2011 posts 2010 posts 2009 posts 2008 posts 2007 posts 2006 posts 2005 posts 2004 posts 2003 posts 2002 posts 2001 posts 2000 posts users  search tips  You must log in or register to post.   Go to page:  1      Non-Film Score Discussion: Warner Bros. and SONY Music vs. Tarzan and me!   Last Post   Posted:   Jun 24, 2019 - 9:47 AM     By:   madmovyman   (Member) First Sony Music told me to desist and remove a video from Facebook that was a humorous karaoke sing-a-long to the popular tune North to Alaska sung by Johnny Horton. Although not allowed to be seen in America, the video can still be viewed by 123 other countries around the world, including the United States Minor Outlying Islands, Cuba, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sweden, among others. Now, yesterday, I posted a short compilation clip from Tarzan's Greatest Adventure. I planned that video to showcase the exciting music by Douglas Gamley, but, during production, it evolved into a scenic display of the film's most important and exciting sequences. It only took 7 minutes for Warner Bros. to jump on my video and demand removal or there would be legal consequences. So, I refused to take the video down. I guess I'm in big trouble now. The video is actually a tribute to the Warner Bros. film and might have actually generated enough interest in Tarzan's Greatest Adventure for people to buy the new blu-ray release of the 1959 movie starring Gordon Scott, Anthony Quayle, Sara Shane and Sean Connery. Anyway, I was surprised today to see that Facebook actually wants me to promote that Tarzan video and are asking me to buy a $30 boost that would allow the banned clip to be seen by more than 6,000 people. But, uh, what about Warner Bros. and their threat to come after me, Facebook? I can still see the video online at https://www.facebook.com/1960sFilmSoundtracksAndMovieFun/ but I don't know if anyone else can.    Posted:   Jun 24, 2019 - 10:38 AM     By:   andy b   (Member) You have a desist or prosecute notice. This is very simple, ignore it & go ahead with Face Book & you will no doubt have issues. All the studios protect their “moving images” I.E. parts of the film, now in this day & age it seems very hypocritical when for example the entire film can be illegally downloaded with just a few clicks of a mouse, BUT you have come up on the WB radar for whatever reasons. As I spent most of my life in the industry & only towards the end did I get to know those on the “pirate” side of things, I can tell you that once you are “noticed” they will look for more & even if at the end of the day all you get is a barrage of threats is it really worth the sleepless nights over a 7 minute clip? If Face Book want the clip have them clear the Rights with WB & once you’re in the clear & have it in writing from WB or have FB give you written clearance & ownership of any subsequent legal issues, go ahead. BUT I know a lot of instances of people who have had issues with major studios & “clips” & to be honest it’s not worth it. In fact, I actually worked on a case in my closing days before retirement where a single shot of Julia Roberts & George Clooney had their representatives & WB actually financially ruin a company! You could of course argue the Fair Use Doctrine, however better have some good lawyers on your side to field the deluge of paper work you will get once you go down that route! Unless your already happy to breach Copy Right & don’t give a hoot, eccentric and have vast sums to counter the studios with? I would walk away while you only have a D or P notice. But it’s up to you. Andy b    Posted:   Jun 24, 2019 - 4:35 PM     By:   gmontag451   (Member) It’s insane how readily and easily copyright holders abuse the public’s right to fair use. I can’t say whether your video qualifies under fair use, but I do know that YouTube is ready to bend over backward to please copyright holders and punish law-abiding citizens. Companies also know that if brought to court, the financial burden of defending your rights is beyond the capability of the general public. Worse is when rights holders do this over content they aren’t even trying to profit from. Granted, it’s their priviledge to squander their own property, but fair use is an important institution shamefully destined for extinction under the current system. (Then there’s Disney and their treatment of public domain Oswald, but that’s another rabbit hole.)    Posted:   Jun 24, 2019 - 5:55 PM     By:   'Lenny Bruce' Marshall   (Member) Connery would have been a better TARZAN!    Posted:   Jun 24, 2019 - 6:46 PM     By:   andy b   (Member) It’s insane how readily and easily copyright holders abuse the public’s right to fair use. Simple, who paid for the work in the first place? It's a business & the "public" who don't pay for the work, should not use it without permission, it's piracy that in this day & age few seem to care about. If you own a car do you let anyone drive it without permission? For some reason the internet seems to be a free for all to use what you want however you want & where & when you want without payment of any kind. My living was paid for by studios who took great risks at vast sums to produce works of entertainment, yes it was their choice & it is their choice having paid for the final product to do with it as they see fit. The public have no Rights to do what they want with it without paying for it. You Tube are correct to remove things that are not bought & paid for, look at this site, these labels at great risk pay for music that they try to bring us, masses of legal work & clearance work, so is it right for someone to just "take it' & do as they seem fit? Who knows what Royalties are still linked to the Burroughs / Tarzan estate & what fine detail has to be after all these years financially covered? If you want to make a 7 minute feature approach the studio & see what they think? who knows you may strike lucky & get a response or as a member of the "public" without representation just end up in recycling. But when the product belongs to someone else best ask first. Andy b    Posted:   Jun 24, 2019 - 6:55 PM     By:   'Lenny Bruce' Marshall   (Member) " You want me to pay? For something on the Internet? It should all be free!"    Posted:   Jun 24, 2019 - 6:57 PM     By:   'Lenny Bruce' Marshall   (Member) Btw The current copyright laws suck! Works produced 90 to 100 years old should.not be the property of corporation9 ; nor.distant relations.    Posted:   Jun 25, 2019 - 12:02 PM     By:   madmovyman   (Member) Those people on my side of the fence, I want to shake your hands and pat your backs like good old friends do after a long absence. What the hell, I'll even buy y'all a beer when you get into town. Here's what we'll do, start a thousand man march against the corporate thugs at Warner Bros. We can hit SONY later. So, we'll carry signage and use megaphones to shout nasty things at the smarmy executives and other loathsome warthogs in the building, or do they have a gigantic complex of structures? No matter, I'll get things started with the first sign... who's up next?    Posted:   Jun 25, 2019 - 12:25 PM     By:   Octoberman   (Member) The corporations need to realize that fans who post vids on YouTube are not actually taking one red penny out of their pockets. It should be seen as what it is--a marketing and promotion tool. If it was ever to be considered otherwise, then someone would have to prove that a 7 minute clip on the internet would actually stop someone from buying the movie. Then they might have a leg to stand on. But I think they don't. Maybe if they are short of cash, having a slew of lawyers on retainer constantly scrutinizing YouTube might be something they'd want to reduce first. Mighty expensive, those lawyers.    Posted:   Jun 25, 2019 - 2:07 PM     By:   'Lenny Bruce' Marshall   (Member) I thought William Gaines died? Publisher of MAD magazine ( a WB property)    Posted:   Jun 25, 2019 - 3:03 PM     By:   Justin Boggan   (Member) I'd like to point out, as documented by Youtubers, the studios aren't even watching a lot of videos; they look at the time stamps of the actions and they only way it could happen in such quick succession is whomever is viewing the potential violations on behalf of a studio, is just going down the line and essentially checking off every box; think of that scene from "The Simpsons" where Homer has Bart fill out something for him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BK2VGmpJ9xo (2:53)     Non-Film Score Discussion: Warner Bros. and SONY Music vs. Tarzan and me!    < 1  >   Go to page:  1   First Post    General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion  Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board You must log in or register to post.   Go to page:  1

© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved. Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.